Geltmeyer K, Duprez V, Blondeel M, Serraes B, Eeckloo K, Malfait S. The effect of different care delivery models in a hospital setting on patient- and nurse-related outcomes: A systematic review with narrative synthesis.
J Adv Nurs 2024. [PMID:
38888260 DOI:
10.1111/jan.16271]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2024] [Revised: 05/10/2024] [Accepted: 05/29/2024] [Indexed: 06/20/2024]
Abstract
AIM
To synthesize and assess the effectiveness of different care delivery models in a hospital setting, taking into account patient- and nurse-related outcomes.
DESIGN
A systematic review with narrative synthesis in which a comparison was made between different care delivery models.
METHODS
The search string consisted of four clusters: 'nursing', 'care delivery models', 'hospital setting' and 'quantitative research designs'. Four electronic databases were searched from the inception of the databases to January 2023: Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science.
RESULTS
In total, 19 studies were included in the systematic review. The most commonly compared care delivery models were functional nursing to primary nursing (n = 6), patient allocation to team nursing (n = 4), team nursing to primary nursing (n = 3) and functional nursing to modular nursing (n = 3). Only one randomized crossover trial was found, other included studies were pretest-posttest designs or quasi-experimental designs. The implementation of a nursing care delivery model was the study intervention. The following aspects of the intervention were not reported or inadequately described by the majority of the authors; tailoring of an intervention, modifications to an intervention and the adherence or fidelity to the intervention. Job satisfaction and quality of nursing care were the most commonly reported nursing outcomes, while patient satisfaction was the most commonly reported patient outcome. Due to a high heterogeneity in outcome measures between the studies, a meta-analysis of the included studies was not possible. All included studies had a high risk of overall bias.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review found mixed evidence, inconsistent reporting of certain elements of the interventions, high heterogeneity in outcome measures and low methodological quality. Although this systematic review could not answer which nursing care delivery model is the most effective or most promising, other important findings from this review may inform future research.
IMPACT
There are differences in care delivery model descriptions and a lack of agreement on the strengths and weaknesses of the care delivery models. No clear-cut answer can be given about the effect of different care delivery models in a hospital setting on patient- and nurse-related outcomes. Job satisfaction and quality of nursing care were the most commonly reported nursing outcomes, while patient satisfaction was the most commonly reported patient outcome. This review can support the development of future care delivery redesign strategies.
REPORTING METHOD
The systematic review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).
PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION
No patient or public contribution.
Collapse